{
  "registry_version": "1.0.0",
  "data": {
    "title": "Communication or Working Style Friction",
    "status": "active",
    "evidence_ids": [
      "evidence.employment_interview_reliability_new_meta_analytic_estimates_by_structure_and_format"
    ],
    "content": "# Communication or Working Style Friction\n\nDuring a collaborative interview exercise the candidate is abrasive in tone, defensive about critique, or not listening.\n\n### Structural Context\n- **Actor:** `candidate`\n- **Nature:** `bias`\n- **Removability:** `candidate`\n\n### Non-Inferences\n- Style friction in a high-pressure interview is not a permanent personality defect.",
    "aliases": [
      "M-015"
    ],
    "id": "mech.communication_or_working_style_friction",
    "type": "mechanism",
    "summary": "During a collaborative interview exercise the candidate is abrasive in tone, defensive about critique, or not listening.",
    "operates_at": [
      "bar.recruiter_screening_call",
      "bar.team_cross_functional_panel"
    ],
    "emissions": [
      {
        "artifact": "obs.communication_mismatch_or_tone_friction_in_panel",
        "fidelity": "direct",
        "likelihood": "high",
        "evidence": [
          "evidence.employment_interview_reliability_new_meta_analytic_estimates_by_structure_and_format"
        ],
        "observed_at": [
          "team"
        ]
      },
      {
        "artifact": "obs.generic_closer_alignment_rejection_template",
        "fidelity": "euphemism",
        "likelihood": "high",
        "evidence": [
          "evidence.hidden_workers_untapped_talent_hbs_accenture"
        ],
        "observed_at": [
          "recruiter"
        ]
      }
    ],
    "facets": {
      "actor": "candidate",
      "nature": "bias",
      "visibility": "observable",
      "removability": "candidate"
    },
    "amplifies": [],
    "masks": [],
    "evidence_level": "proven",
    "honest_baseline": true,
    "specimens": [
      {
        "kind": "transcript",
        "label": "The exchange the note refers to",
        "context": "minute 33, pairing exercise",
        "lines": [
          {
            "speaker": "Interviewer",
            "at": "33:02",
            "text": "I think this loop is doing more work than it needs to.",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Candidate",
            "at": "33:06",
            "text": "It is fine. The input is bounded.",
            "tell": true
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Interviewer",
            "at": "33:11",
            "text": "Sure, but if it were not?",
            "tell": false
          },
          {
            "speaker": "Candidate",
            "at": "33:14",
            "text": "Then I would change it. But it is.",
            "tell": false
          }
        ],
        "reading": "The panel recorded this as resistance to critique. A short answer under time pressure and a defensive posture look identical in a transcript — which is why this belongs in the honest-baseline set and not in the excuses."
      }
    ],
    "perspectives": [
      {
        "actor": "actor.candidate",
        "sees": "The exchange as it happened under time pressure, and a rejection that names fit or collaboration without pointing at a moment.",
        "reads": "A short answer given while still working on the problem, and a note about it that cannot be read back. There is nothing to check the reading against.",
        "does": "Reconstructs the session from memory and changes how disagreement is phrased in the next one."
      },
      {
        "actor": "actor.hiring_manager",
        "sees": "The panel's written impressions of how a disagreement went, alongside the technical scores. No recording, and each interviewer saw a different half hour.",
        "reads": "A signal about how the person takes review in a team that has to work with them daily. A bad hire on this axis is visible for a year and has a name on it.",
        "does": "Weighs the impression against the technical notes, and where the panel is split resolves it toward the more conservative outcome."
      },
      {
        "actor": "actor.recruiter",
        "sees": "A panel recommendation with the reason recorded as style or fit, and no transcript behind it.",
        "reads": "A decision that is final and hard to put in writing to the candidate without it reading as a judgement about the person.",
        "does": "Sends the standard closer-alignment wording, or relays the specific note if the panel has phrased it as something the candidate can act on."
      }
    ],
    "non_inferences": [
      "Style friction in a high-pressure interview is not a permanent personality defect."
    ],
    "agency_zones": {
      "candidate": "medium",
      "hiring-manager": "low",
      "recruiter": "low"
    }
  }
}